It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
On another note, I do find it strange that a Bond candidate has to re-enact scenes from FRWL for a screen-test; a vastly superior script (and movie) that the eventual winner will not be given anything remotely close to. Maybe they need to be screen-tested against a couple P&W scenes, which is now the new Bond gold-standard?
Has Brozza ever NOT backed someone mentioned in the media as potential James Bond?
And in odd ways. Put a bit of wiggle? When he suggested Colin Farrell, Brosnan said that he "Would eat the heads of the other candidates". So Brosnan's pre-requisite for Bond has gone from cannibalism to wiggling!
https://www.mi6-hq.com/news/index.php?itemid=1809
I may take up cannibalism to see if I get a shot at the role.
He was also enthusiastic about Colin Salmon. And Ewan McGregor. Name one actor Brosnan agrees he'd be a great Bond.
;)
Bond hitting a woman (although I guess that is too politically incorrect these days!) would seem the sort of thing I associate with the term 'roughness'. In theory you could hire a posh(ish) type actor like Tom Hiddleston and have his Bond strangle a villain. That could help sell Hiddleston's roughness/toughness. I wouldn't want a Jason Statham type actor as Bond because he seems good at roughness but I'd find it hard to believe he can be suave or gentlemanly, but a Statham type actor could appeal to the mainstream audience. Going from Craig to a Jason Statham type isn't a huge leap and it's possible Barbara Broccoli isn't a fan of the conventional Bond (hence why Craig was cast).
Bond Bombshell wrote:
All great points. It's worth adding that Craig was cast by a woman. All the other Bond actors were cast by men. Barbara Broccoli has her own vision of what Bond looks like, how he acts, how much he emotion he reveals, how 'human' he is. I think your points are very interesting however I'm doubtful Broccoli would choose a George Lazenby type. I can't see Broccoli ever going that route. I've accepted that my vision of what Bond is like is not the same as Barbara Broccoli's vision and I don't expect our visions to be compatible when the next actor is cast.
One hopes that it was his acting, which she is on record as stating was the primary driver for that decision as well as for who gets picked for Bond #007. If that's the case, then it's quite possible that I could be happy with the next choice.
These comments about changes in the British film & tv industry are troubling if true however, particularly the 5ft 7 wimps bit. Can a contemporary Bond film be made in the future which is true to the character in such an environment? I think it still can. The expectations of who Bond is and how he is depicted will have to change with the times. If history is any guide, they will take a quite different approach with the next man in comparison to Craig, for variety's sake. Both physically and in terms of his general style.
Interesting times ahead. The only given is that not everyone will be pleased with the choice.
I recall your mentioning that film previously. I neglected to seek it out, and will try to find a copy somewhere or online soon. I must watch Money Monster again too.
Haven't heard about Starred Up before. Should probably check it out.
Regarding BAFTA's and Oscars; I have issues with these sorts of awards. I can actually count on one hand the number of films I've watched after first learning about them after winning these awards (I'm of course not counting films I've watched and enjoyed before receiving a nomination). The films I enjoy seem to be the opposite of what you'd call "Oscar material".
___________
Haha, Jeff Goldblum always delivers on talk shows! I usually don't watch them, but I never switch channels when he's on. Nice attention to detail with the pose!
It's interesting to note some people say "no male models" and yet some/many Bond fans consider George Lazenby, a male model, to be the toughest Bond in terms of ability to convey a convincing fight on screen.
I guess people are hardwired to assume "pretty men" are less macho than "less pretty men" but even Clint Eastwood (arguably the definitive tough man actor of American pop culture circa 1960s - 1980s) was a rather handsome, pretty man in his youth. Personally I think Eastwood's Dirty Harry is more macho than Craig's Bond so I disagree with Pierce Brosnan's recent comments that Craig looks like he can kill a man (thereby implying he's ideal or good casting). I'm sure most men can look like they can kill a man if they get angry enough! Anyway, it's all subjective!
Interesting. This might be for the controversial thread but I always found Lazenby as the less manly of the Bond actors, his fighting skills notwithstanding. Maybe because of his youth.
Fundamentally I think it comes down to how one projects on screen at certain moments. That can be done via acting, or it can be done through physicality. Or it can be done through both.
The actor must be credible as someone who could kill when the moment calls for it. I think it would help if he is distinct looking (I don't think the scar is necessary though), with a certain cruelty to the features. Again, this will be in the eye of the beholder.
Laz was indeed a male model, and he wasn't the most built or beefiest looking guy. He had a very lean and athletic physique, and looked darn good in those suits. I thought he was near perfect physically.
The only thing I'm unsure about with him as Bond is the suave classy RP accented side, because I've never seen him play a character like that. But I think he'd nail the charismatic, dangerous side of Bond.
RE: suave, classy and sophisticated- that's something I truly have missed greatly over the last little while and so my bias is for someone who can naturally deliver that onscreen too. It seems to increasingly be a lost art. Screen magnetism though is essential for a Bond actor.
Only wish there was a suitable actor with a Cary Grant level of charisma around.
Acting isn’t exactly effeminate if you’re going for a tough or down to earth role. It’s effeminate if you slip into a cheesy tight costume and act a part from a Shakespearean play in a stagy format. Though, I wouldn’t exactly call that “effeminate” myself.
What we mean by “male models” is a reference to an actual effeminate metrosexual appearance that takes the alpha male element away from the masculine character, and that’s what we don’t want in a Bond. Connery, Lazenby and Craig I’m sure are quite tough men who can hold their own in real life without any effort.
Given that, I'm not really all that concerned about the masculinity element. It will be taken care of inherently via the script and direction and they will vary the emphasis as required based on the prevailing sensibilities of the specific time and the actor's strengths as needed.
Connery ("but of course"; "she should have kept her mouth shut")
Laz (was desperate in his fight scenes to survive, so he beat you harder than you could beat him)
Dalton (not as a fighter, but as an assassin-- firing on Kara, meeting Pushkin, "killing" Pushkin, trying to assassinate Sanchez ("watch the birdie, you bastard"... )
Craig ("made you feel, did he?"; taking out the "bomb maker"; stairwell fight; taking out Mr. White; assassinating Mitchell and Slate....
Charisma, suave - yes. Manly in a alright for the ball room manner - yes. Manly in a way Bond should be - no.
Fair try, but there's a difference in background. Lazenby was a (used)car salesman ending up a model purely by accident. His fighting skills were real, as it had been one of the ways to get through life for him. The same goes for Connery and Moore. Their respective backgrounds were of hardship, and they used their real life survival methods in their respective Bond-incarnations.
Modern-day models (and actors) however seldom have such a tough background. They don't have the life experience to draw from, which makes it harder for us to believe them.
I forgot the name of the film, but not too long ago there was a film made about a SEALs-raid. It came over increadeable real, mostly because it was a re-enactment by the Original SEALs team.
Eastwood and Connery were hard men off-screen, that's the difference. They weren't pretending!